# Condensing cause double dynamics

Is there a way to condense the instruments with asynchronized dynamics but only keep the initial dynamic? Like the first picture on the flutes, the condensing caused two dynamics up and down; although in the second picture, when I tried to hide the rests, then there are two dynamics at the bottom. It just looks so weird…

Thanks for the help!

No, the markings will combine only when they match exactly. Obviously this is arranging two players to sound like one line, but Dorico’s job is notation, not conception. A score must show what the players see in their parts, unless it’s some sort of reduction. This illustrates the difference between condensing and reduction.

(P.S. That is awfully awkward for Oboes.)

1 Like

Thanks, that’s what I’ve thought… condensing is helpful in some ways, but I hope they can complete this function in the future… Otherwise, I have to give up this function just for looking good…

I’d prefer your first example (with the rests). The condensing feature is actually doing a great job here, and I agree with Mark that the dynamics shouldn’t be consolidated.
The only real anomaly is the forte for flute 1 appearing below the staff in bar 2 in your second screenshot. Dorico seems to give the supposed dynamics grouping p<f precedence over the start of the passage where flute 1 becomes up-stem only. If these dynamics are grouped now, you might try to ungroup them, maybe the f will move up.

One small thing I’m not always happy with is the amount of vertical space the markings 1./2./a2 take, and that they’re often obscured by barlines.

1 Like

In the first example, 1. and 2. are not even needed. It should be clear from the direction of stems and placement of rests which part it is.

I guess it’s because the rests define a new condensing boundary every time. Maybe it would be a nice idea to have a kind of condensing change that tells Dorico not to consider rests as condensing delimiters until further notice?